Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Started this at the weekend. A simple conversion from the Revell FGA9 into an FR10. The camera nose is made from a small section of clear sprue inserted into a pre-drilled hole in the nose cap. This is faired over with Milliput and the two oblique camera ports drilled out.

Decals are from Xtradecal - I'm not sure which particular aircraft to depict yet - though it will have to be a late sixties FR10 as the underside is painted Light Aircraft Grey - and as we all know this wasn't introduced until the late sixties....... :smartass:

100_6699.jpg

100_6700.jpg

100_6701.jpg

100_6702.jpg

100_6703.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
What's wrong with it?

It looks like they've just copied the standard nose in clear resin! The FR10's nose is longer and has a flatter front.....(Not to be confused with the GA.11 type nose!)

Looky here.........

Hunter FR.10

Edited by Bill Clark
Link to post
Share on other sites

FAA Models does a conversion set for a PR10/GA11 but i think it should be FR10/GA11 this includes new FR nose but for some reason it has an extra camera port under the nose, fill it the oblique cameras are indented fill with something clear the front camera is solid but nicely represented i would paint it to represent the shield also in the set is a GA11 nose with Harley light,flaps no cut outs,nose panel with no gun ports,two part air brake,tailhook and bumper,two 100 Gal tanks, £6.00 from a2z looks nice and well moulded.

Derek

Link to post
Share on other sites
FAA Models does a conversion set for a PR10/GA11 but i think it should be FR10/GA11 this includes new FR nose but for some reason it has an extra camera port under the nose, fill it

It should be PR/GA11 - the Royal Navy had some mk 11s with PR noses.

They also had the undernose camera port, as did some of the Export PRs (see this ex-Oman one)

http://www.airliners.net/open.file?id=1309370&size=M

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys,

I thought the Quickboost nose looked wrong and was going to get around to asking here someday. Glad you guys cleared that up.

But now I'm confused. The FR.10 didn't have the same recce nose as the FAA birds? Help Hunter experts, help.

Jim

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guys,

I thought the Quickboost nose looked wrong and was going to get around to asking here someday. Glad you guys cleared that up.

But now I'm confused. The FR.10 didn't have the same recce nose as the FAA birds? Help Hunter experts, help.

Jim

It did actually Jim - although some seem to have an additional lower camera port?

FRADU PRXI

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's worth pointing out (and Bill knows this!) that the port and starboard camera ports are offset (Port being higher up than starboard) and that the forward facing camera is actually a metal 'eyelid' as on the Harrier GR3 LRMTS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a few observations on cameras in Hunters if it's any use.

The original Hawker proposal for the PR Hunter was a private venture and incorporated five cameras. Two of these were mounted between frames 3 and 6, i.e. the area where the nosegear retracts and where the pilot's oxygen bottles, de-icer tank etc. are mounted. The other three were in the nose-piece; one facing forward, as Dave pointed out, behind 'eyelids', and one on each side. However the Air Ministry decided that only the three in the nose were required and so the two further back were deleted when the FR.10 went into production (not really 'production' as such since they were all converted from F.6s).

The PR.11 and FR.10 shared this same nose configuration. There were however, instances where an additional port was added as we've seen in some of the photos posted here. The original FR.10/PR.11 spec. meant that there was never a vertical camera in the Hunter. I have always been under the impression that this was added in a small number of cases to address that issue. I have also assumed in those cases that the normal forward-facing camera was relocated to 'look' through the vertical port instead. If you've ever seen a Vinten F.95 camera up close you 'll know that they're no pocket Instamatic (!) and so there is no room for an additional camera in there. That's always been an assumption based on little more than scraps of evidence and my knowledge of Hunter nether-regions - so may be complete rubbish!

The 'other' camera nose, which the Quickboost item seems to be based on, was a relatively late and small-scale modification (using the standard FGA.9 nose piece) to incorporate a single F.95 camera in a similar fashion to that fitted in the nose of the Harrier GR.1. There weren't many like that, not least of which, because it meant removing the radar gun-ranging equipment in order to accomodate the camera. It was used for a variety of purposes, one of which I believe was with so-equipped Brawdy-based Hunters flying in support of West Wales Police on anti-smuggling operations!

Not sure any of that helps with the original subject of this thread though. :winkgrin:

Link to post
Share on other sites
I have also assumed in those cases that the normal forward-facing camera was relocated to 'look' through the vertical port instead.

Would have to be really, wouldn't it? Presumably for duties that didn't involve scooting around at ultra-low level!! (PR vs FR)

Not sure any of that helps with the original subject of this thread though. :winkgrin:

Dunno, but it is very useful info - not sure if I've seen a photo of the modified one, have to look again.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Dunno, but it is very useful info - not sure if I've seen a photo of the modified one, have to look again.

I agree its very useful and very intersting Stephen - there's some stuff their that I never knew about, so its added to my knowledge...

And Dave if you have Warpaint no 8 (On the Hunter!) there's a colour photo at the bottom of page 37 of 58 Sqn's FGA9 XF419/"L" with what I assume is the modified nose section

Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree its very useful and very intersting Stephen - there's some stuff their that I never knew about, so its added to my knowledge...

Glad it's of interest - no guarantees it's actually right mind...! :analintruder:

And Dave if you have Warpaint no 8 (On the Hunter!) there's a colour photo at the bottom of page 37 of 58 Sqn's FGA9 XF419/"L" with what I assume is the modified nose section

That's the one.

Link to post
Share on other sites
And Dave if you have Warpaint no 8 (On the Hunter!) there's a colour photo at the bottom of page 37 of 58 Sqn's FGA9 XF419/"L" with what I assume is the modified nose section

never noticed that before! Now that looks wierd!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I went and flipped through the Warpaint last night and I think I found two FGAs with the other camera nose. (I forgot to write down which planes on which pages.) However, what struck me as odd, as almost all the late service FGAs had noses whose camo patterns didn't match the fuselage. I never noticed that before. Were Hunter noses interchangeable?

Jim

Link to post
Share on other sites
I went and flipped through the Warpaint last night and I think I found two FGAs with the other camera nose. (I forgot to write down which planes on which pages.) However, what struck me as odd, as almost all the late service FGAs had noses whose camo patterns didn't match the fuselage. I never noticed that before. Were Hunter noses interchangeable?

Jim

I would imagine so - I recall a Harrier bod saying that parts were interchangeable between Kingston Harrier airframes, but AV-8B/harrier IIs were quite different!

XG154 on p40 is another

Link to post
Share on other sites
Were Hunter noses interchangeable?

Jim

Yes and no. Yes, in as much as the basic 'shell' of any nose will fit any aircraft. But no in that it's the internal equipment configuration that dictates which nose will actually fit.

For example, the basic Hunter nose cone (or "nose-piece" to give it it's proper name) is a completely empty shell. Literally all that's in there is the pipe leading from the ram air intake to the connection that takes the air into the cockpit. In this case the nose-piece simply provides a fairing for the gun ranging radar equipment and the G.90 gun camera that's mounted on a framework on the forward face of Frame 3b.

The modified single camera nose (that you've noted in the Warpaint book) is exactly the same 'empty' nose-piece but with a camera window set into the lower starboard side. This still provides nothing more than a fairing over the equipment in the nose, except that in this instance the radar ranging gubbins is replaced with a Vinten F.95 camera. The standard nose-piece would fit perfectly well in place of the modified camera nose-piece except that the camera wouldn't be able to see much!

The proper FR.10 (and PR.11) nose is considerably different however. In this case the nose-piece does contain equipment in it's own right, i.e. the forward facing camera (and associated 'eyelid' mechanism) is mounted inside the nose-piece itself and so comes away with it when it's removed from the aircraft. A special stand was provided to place the nose-piece into while the camera was being worked on. In the FR.10 there is no radar ranging equipment or mounting framework. Instead there is a structure fitted to the forward face of Frame 3b (that's the bulkhead the nose-piece on all Hunters attaches to) into which the two offset camera are mounted. These align with the side windows in the nose-piece when it is fitted to the aircraft.

The four mounting points for the nose-piece are identical on all Hunters so, getting back to the interchangability question, in theory an FR.10 nose can be fitted to an FGA.9 or F.6 for example so long as the radar head is removed first. This is how we have two F.6s in UK museums masquerading as FR.10s - one at Norwich and another at Long Marston. Similarly, a standard fighter nose-piece could be fitted to an FR.10 without modification - but there'd be no point of course because the photos would be crap!

In terms of part-swapping amongst aircraft of the same mark then yes, Hawker achieved very high levels of interchangability, even between the Hunters built outside of the UK (in Belgium and Holland) under license.

Sorry, that was a long answer to a short question!

Edited by StephenMG
Link to post
Share on other sites

Not a great deal of progress to report on, what with one thing and another...but progress none-the-less:

100_6745.jpg

Here's a couple of shots that should hopefully demonstrate the shape difference (Well, my interpretation anyway!!!) on the FR nose

100_6748.jpg

100_6751.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...